Town Square

California must shrink the population of its teeming prisons by nearly 43,000 inmates

Original post made
by TopCop, Downtown,
on Aug 4, 2009

By Carol J. Williams
10:18 PM PDT, August 4, 2009
California must shrink the population of its teeming prisons by nearly 43,000 inmates over the next two years to meet constitutional standards, a panel of three federal judges ruled Tuesday, ordering the state to come up with a reduction plan by mid-September.

The panel ruled that state prisons are so overcrowded and the system's healthcare so dysfunctional that the conditions constitute cruel and unusual punishment. A reduction plan is due next month.

The order cited Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's own words when he proclaimed a state of emergency in the corrections system in 2006 and warned of substantial risk to prison staff, inmates and the general public, saying "immediate action is necessary to prevent death and harm."

Tuesday's ruling heightens the stakes for a legislative debate over prisons that will take place later this month. As part of the agreement to close the state's $26-billion budget gap, the governor and lawmakers agreed to cut $1.2 billion from the prisons budget, but postponed decisions on how to hit that goal.

The governor and most legislative leaders back a plan that would reduce prison populations by as many as 37,000 over the next two years using a combination of early releases, changes in parole policies and shifting of some prisoners to county jails.

Debate on that plan will be contentious, with many Republicans opposed. But the judges' ruling means that defeating the plan would not only unravel a major piece of the budget agreement but also potentially cede decisionmaking over prison policies to the federal courts.
Lengthy process

The 185-page opinion follows a trial last year and nearly 14 years of deliberations over lawsuits brought by inmates alleging cruel and unusual punishment, which moved the state case into federal jurisdiction. The opinion accuses the state of fostering "criminogenic" conditions that lead prisoners and parolees to commit more crimes, feeding a cycle of recidivism.

"The constitutional deficiencies in the California prison system's medical and mental health system cannot be resolved in the absence of a prisoner release order," the judges concluded.

They stopped short of issuing a release edict, though, giving state officials 45 days to come up with their own plan for reducing overcrowding while observing that alternatives to release, such as building new prisons, were "too distant" and unlikely to be funded.

Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown said the state would comply with the order to produce a plan, but repeated criticism that the judges had ignored significant improvements made in recent years.

He said he doubts the Supreme Court, to which state officials could appeal any release order, would find that current prison conditions violate the Constitution.

"The courts are ordering the state to come up with a plan to release all these prisoners, but the question is: Which prisoners? Release to what -- halfway houses, GPS monitoring? And what happens when they commit another crime -- do they come back? There's a lot that is not clear," Brown said.

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Secretary Matthew Cate said he hoped the judges would back down if state officials and lawmakers make progress in reducing the state's prison population this month, as planned.

The administration's proposal to cut the inmate population by 37,000 over two years could be approved by the Legislature with a majority vote -- meaning no support would be needed by conservative Republicans who threatened to scuttle last month's budget deal if prisoner releases were included.

The governor's plan would allow the state to place on home detention prisoners with less than a year left on their sentences and those who are elderly or infirm. It would also change sentencing and parole rules to reward those who show evidence of rehabilitation.

But Schwarzenegger may be reluctant to use the courts as a hammer to push his plan through. Administration officials have repeatedly said that the court has overstepped its boundaries. The overcrowding problem, Cate said, is a state problem that needs to be fixed by the governor and lawmakers.

"It is not the job of the federal court to do this," he said.

Noting the legislative session that begins in two weeks, Prison Law Office Director Donald Specter, who brought the prisoners' suits, said lawmakers now face the choice of being "part of the solution or continuing to be part of the problem."

Potential win-win

Specter emphasized, as did the judges, that the ruling "doesn't mean that 40,000 prisoners are going to walk out of prison tomorrow."
"If done right, this could be a win-win situation for the entire state, as the prisons will be safer for my clients and the staff who work there, taxpayers will save hundreds of millions of dollars a year and communities will be safer as a result," Specter said, pointing to the judges' opinion that prison conditions contribute to repeat offenses.

The judges capped the prison population at no more than 137% of designed capacity of 84,000. That would mean release of 42,920 inmates to meet the population ceiling of 115,080.

Some lawmakers welcomed the ruling while others vowed to fight it.

"It's frankly a day of reckoning for those who have pushed for constant sentence enhancements, who would decimate rehabilitation programs and who oppose revenues to support state services," said Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles), alluding to Republican lawmakers' conflicting efforts to be tough on crime while cutting spending.

"Today's decision by the three-judge panel is a nightmare come true for California families," countered Assembly Minority Leader Sam Blakeslee of San Luis Obispo. "Any fair-minded court will see there is no way to reduce our prison population by nearly 43,000 without letting out some very dangerous criminals onto our streets and into our neighborhoods."
The judges pointedly rejected any notion that conditions have improved. Citing testimony during last year's trial by some of the nation's foremost prison administrators, the judges said the experts reported "they have never previously witnessed such appalling prison conditions."

Until overcrowding is reduced, the state will be unable to provide "constitutionally compliant care," concluded the panel comprised of U.S. District Judges Thelton Henderson and Lawrence Karlton, and U.S. 9th Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt.

The judges said overcrowding at prison reception centers approaches three times designed capacity, frustrating prison intake officials' ability to identify incoming prisoners with medical or mental health problems.

Overcrowding has led to conditions that contribute to the spread of disease, require increased use of lockdowns to control inmates, and impede authorities' ability to provide essential healthcare, the judges said. It also "worsens many of the risk factors for suicide among inmates and increases the prevalence and acuity of mental illness," they added.

Conditions are "often dangerous, and on many occasions fatal," the judges said, alluding to reports that California inmates die of treatable or avoidable illnesses at the rate of one per week.

Henderson, a judge of the U.S. District Court for Northern California, seized oversight of the prison healthcare network in 2006 and appointed a receiver to fix the widespread deficiencies.

J. Clark Kelso, the receiver, said in a recent interview that his staff was making progress on a daunting array of projects but that significant improvements remain at least a year away. He plans to computerize inmate medical records, replace a deficient pharmacy operation, build at least $2 billion worth of hospitals and upgrade existing ones.

"Tuesday's ruling heightens the stakes for a legislative debate over prisons that will take place later this month. As part of the agreement to close the state's $26-billion budget gap, the governor and lawmakers agreed to cut $1.2 billion from the prisons budget, but postponed decisions on how to hit that goal."

So we got screwed again by the Govener! Notice the words "but postponed decisions on how to hit that goal"?

Posted by Say, What?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 4, 2009 at 11:06 pm

How exactly was that a racist comment about the majority of the illegals in this state?

"Here's an idea" said the truth. What is with you liberals calling people racists?

It's called the LAW. I realize you don't think it applies to you, but the rest of us that actually do abide by it would appreciate others that don't break the law to get here and then surprise <gasp> break the laws while living here!

Posted by Another Gatetree Resident
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Aug 5, 2009 at 4:47 am

One Question -- How many of these "individuals" sit on death row? Start zappin' a few and the population begins to drop. People -- get real. You can't be anti-death penalty yet not want these types of "individuals" released into your communities. You can't have it both ways.

Posted by J
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 5, 2009 at 8:56 am

I am assuming that the prisoners they are considering releasing early would be non-violent offenders (ie- somebody busted for possession of marijuana, or a DUI). I think a work-furlough program, where these individuals are no longer housed and fed by the state is a good idea. The can serve community service and pick up trash at the side of the freeway, work pulling weeds at local community centers, or libraries, or state hospitals who have lost maintenance staff due to the state's workers being on 3-4 day work weeks...make up their time in that manner.

"Zapping" the prisoners will get the ACLU or like organizations all up in arms about violating the appeals process. Some type of reform is in order to get that process rolling forward, so that we aren't storing those that have been sentenced to execution for 20 yrs or longer- Our judicial system has decided their fate and they have been convicted. I wish I understood why they take so long to get to the executioner. Shipping illegals away is another one I don't quite get the suggestion of...If they are in our prisons, and have not already been taken back to their native country by INS, I would assume they have been convicted of something criminal (other then simply being here illegally). Shipping them away allows them to walk away from a conviction for a criminal act without consequences

Give me a break. Forget the appeals process. Did their victims get an appeal? Zap them and move on. No one wants them and no one cares about them. The ACLU can get screwed. If they want to keep them they can pay for them but I and sick of paying for criminals to exist.

Posted by Another Gatetree Resident
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Aug 6, 2009 at 8:41 am

John -- I'm with you. I go so far as to feel we should save animals and do medical testing on these folks. If they survive the testing and it proves to be a benefit to society, THEN they have the option of parole.

Let the ACLU folks who have relatives dying of cancer and AIDS dispute that one.

Posted by Nosy Neighbors
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Aug 6, 2009 at 2:50 pm

Hey "UG", just what is racist about wanting to rid our prisons of illegal gang members that have murdered, stolen, sold drugs & participated in all sorts of illegal & anti-social behavior? They've come here illegally (or un-documented if that makes you feel better) & have chosen to work against the system, to not participate & integrate into our society, work hard, raise families, etc. They have (IMHO) lost their right to stay here. They are sucking money from our legal system that cannot afford to incarcerate our own US citizen-criminals.

The hard working illegal immigrants that populate our state might be a drain on our medical, law enforcement & social welfare systems but at least they are contributing to society on a certain level & are at least trying to "americanize" themselves. The criminals (oh, btw, UG, which represent over 30% of our prison population) need to go bye-bye back to wherever south of the border they came from.

The point of the appeals process in cases where the death penalty has been applied is to ensure that the person the state intendeds to execute is in fact actual guilty of the crime they have been convicted of. Simply being convicted of a crime in a court room is not a De facto proof of guilt, and in any case where the life of a convicted individual is in the hands of the state, every avenue available to prove or disprove the guilt of innocence of the individual must be explored. While the appeal process may be obtuse in that it takes years upon years to run its course it is there for a reason. Yes, reforming this process could have some impact on crowding, and give victims families the closure they in many cases need by making the process happen faster.

As for the illegals in the prison system, I agree they should be send away. In other parts of the world if you are arrested as an illegal or even a non resident of any kind and convicted of a crime (any crime) you are deported after spending your time in prison, if in fact they decide to keep you for your prison time. As such I would say that sending illegals out of the country who are already in prison or freshly convicted of a violent crime is not racist in the slightest, this is in my opinion a logical thing to do.

Posted by Brains
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 7, 2009 at 7:22 pm

Excuse me folks!

"Hey "UG", just what is racist about wanting to rid our prisons of illegal gang members that have murdered, stolen, sold drugs & participated in all sorts of illegal & anti-social behavior? They've come here illegally (or un-documented if that makes you feel better) & have chosen to work against the system, to not participate & integrate into our society, work hard, raise families, etc. They have (IMHO) lost their right to stay here. They are sucking money from our legal system that cannot afford to incarcerate our own US citizen-criminals."

I feel the need to comment on a few of the previous posts which I find extremely disturbing.

Disease? Posted
""Overcrowding has led to conditions that contribute to the spread of disease, require increased use of lockdowns to control inmates, and impede authorities' ability to provide essential healthcare"
OMG! And we though the bird flu was bad? Problem solved, release the "diseased" into the general population!"

Release diseases into the inmate populations? Are you saying that it is OK to kill people who have committed a crime? When one commits a crime and is convicted of that crime our system of law prescribes a set punishment for that person. Once this punishment has been carried out they have repaid their debt to society. Prisoners, are still human being, and are entitled to the same human rights as you regardless of what you may think.

John posted
"Give me a break. Forget the appeals process. Did their victims get an appeal? Zap them and move on. No one wants them and no one cares about them. The ACLU can get screwed. If they want to keep them they can pay for them but I and sick of paying for criminals to exist."

Read my above comment on the appeal process. Once again criminals have the same human rights as you. You do not get to decide who lives or dies. On a side note about the appeals process, as it turns out DNA evidence has turned over quite a few death penalty cases n the past few years as the technology has become more accessible to more areas. Your right who cares if they might be innocent, as long as you don't have to pay for these monsters to existů

Another Gatetree Resident posted
"John -- I'm with you. I go so far as to feel we should save animals and do medical testing on these folks. If they survive the testing and it proves to be a benefit to society, THEN they have the option of parole.
Let the ACLU folks who have relatives dying of cancer and AIDS dispute that one."

Is this 1940's Germany? We do not conduct medical experiments on convicts, nor will we ever. This is frankly the most disturbing thing I have seen on these forums as of late. Do you place so little value on human life that you find it acceptable to even consider this kind of monstrous behavior on the part of the body politic? I guess Hitler thought it was a good enough idea, maybe he is your secret hero?

For all the people screaming that "their" America is being taken away and changed you need to shut up. This shows just how ridiculous you all have become. These kinds of things are not and never were what made America. We had this thing called WW2 a while back, maybe you head about it on TV? Millions of people died to stop people that were doing just exactly what you people are calling for. I say people like you need to get your heads on right, learn to be adults and accept the fact that you will not always get your way, people will not always agree with you, and you are not always right. But this bull about killing off our prison populations and the like, show you all for exactly what you are.

Posted by M, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, 18 minutes ago
I feel the need to comment on a few of the previous posts which I find extremely disturbing.
Disease? Posted
""Overcrowding has led to conditions that contribute to the spread of disease, require increased use of lockdowns to control inmates, and impede authorities' ability to provide essential healthcare"
OMG! And we though the bird flu was bad? Problem solved, release the "diseased" into the general population!"
Release diseases into the inmate populations? Are you saying that it is OK to kill people who have committed a crime? When one commits a crime and is convicted of that crime our system of law prescribes a set punishment for that person. Once this punishment has been carried out they have repaid their debt to society. Prisoners, are still human being, and are entitled to the same human rights as you regardless of what you may think.
---- What I am talking about is the release of prison inmates into OUR POULATION, that have or have been exposed to Aids, Hepatitis and other communicable diseases. The fact is that these inmates in MANY cases do not get proper screening or care for these diseases in the first place. The diseases are rampant in the prisons and the cost of treatment is just not in the budget.

John posted
"Give me a break. Forget the appeals process. Did their victims get an appeal? Zap them and move on. No one wants them and no one cares about them. The ACLU can get screwed. If they want to keep them they can pay for them but I and sick of paying for criminals to exist."
Read my above comment on the appeal process. Once again criminals have the same human rights as you. You do not get to decide who lives or dies. On a side note about the appeals process, as it turns out DNA evidence has turned over quite a few death penalty cases n the past few years as the technology has become more accessible to more areas. Your right who cares if they might be innocent, as long as you don't have to pay for these monsters to existů

---- Not my post butů Incarcerated inmates do NOT have the same rights as those not incarcerated. They actually have VERY few rights, other than appeal, which cost us a bundle!

------ However YOU are 100% correct about the increasing numbers of inmates that have spent most of their lives in prison, only to have recent DNA prove their innocence. There was a LOT of racial profiling and snitches getting light sentences for pointing out and testifying against whoever the States told them to testify against. That's not acceptable by ANY means~ NO "speedy trials" in which people are found guilty do NOT mean that in fact the individual committed the crime. It's the American way though and the system we have as our "founding Fathers " assured that.
Another Gatetree Resident posted
"John -- I'm with you. I go so far as to feel we should save animals and do medical testing on these folks. If they survive the testing and it proves to be a benefit to society, THEN they have the option of parole.
Let the ACLU folks who have relatives dying of cancer and AIDS dispute that one."

--- YOU are pathetic and should be ashamed of your self! That's against the constitution as well as the Geneva Convention.
Is this 1940's Germany? We do not conduct medical experiments on convicts, nor will we ever. This is frankly the most disturbing thing I have seen on these forums as of late. Do you place so little value on human life that you find it acceptable to even consider this kind of monstrous behavior on the part of the body politic? I guess Hitler thought it was a good enough idea, maybe he is your secret hero?
For all the people screaming that "their" America is being taken away and changed you need to shut up. This shows just how ridiculous you all have become. These kinds of things are not and never were what made America. We had this thing called WW2 a while back, maybe you head about it on TV? Millions of people died to stop people that were doing just exactly what you people are calling for. I say people like you need to get your heads on right, learn to be adults and accept the fact that you will not always get your way, people will not always agree with you, and you are not always right. But this bull about killing off our prison populations and the like, show you all for exactly what you are.

Posted by Another Gatetree Resident
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Aug 7, 2009 at 8:00 pm

Posted by M, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood

Is this 1940's Germany? We do not conduct medical experiments on convicts, nor will we ever. This is frankly the most disturbing thing I have seen on these forums as of late. Do you place so little value on human life that you find it acceptable to even consider this kind of monstrous behavior on the part of the body politic? I guess Hitler thought it was a good enough idea, maybe he is your secret hero?

The simple fact that you would compare convicted criminals the likes of Richard Allen Davis, Scott Peterson, and Charles Manson (to name just a few) to the innocent Jews who were murdered for no reason other than their religion negates your entire point.

You may find my viewpoint "disturbing," but I find yours beyond belief.

Brains, are you nuts? INS has NOT DEPORTED at least 20 million "illegals". I cannot tell you how much that tickles me! tee hee hee, tee hee hee... In addition, the children of "illegals" receive FREE medical care, education, Section 8 housing, food stamps, milk for their children, clothes, etc. through various organizations. The US will never be able to return the million and millions and millions of "illegals" who are determined to stay in the US. Corporate Americans wants the "illegals" to remain in our country and eventually, they will receive amnesty! How does that grab you? You see, with all the attention on screaming at Town Hall meetings, tens of thousands are arriving yearly, most of whom sneak across the border, fence post or no fence post. Those with marketable skills are finding jobs. Even in our economy, many are still employed and new arrivals are finding jobs...that Americans do not want!

So while Americans are wrapped up in screaming at each other, thinking that they are going to be euthanized, thousands of "illegals" are arriving in the Land of Liberty and Plenty! HOORAY!

VIVA AMERICA! VIVA AMERICA! VIVA AMERICA!

Incidentally, Mengele was brought to the US after the war where he continued to practice medicine under the auspices of the US government. Survivor's of the Holocaust recognized him immediately. They were not criminals but they did receive treatment from Mengele. good evening...

Yes, prisoners do have fewer rights than the rest of society however I clearly stated human rights. Human rights are the same for everyone across the board.

As for my comment directed at your post about disease I must have misread what you were trying to say initially, my apologies.

As for "Another Gatetree Resident"

Murderers, innocent people, anyone for that matter regardless of their social standing for whatever reason, all share the same human rights. Regardless of how heinous a crime someone has committed medical testing upon them is absolutely unacceptable for any reason. Frankly your position on the matter is despicable. As My GOD! Stated what you are calling for is against the constitution and Geneva Convention.

Posted by Another Gatetree Resident
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Aug 9, 2009 at 2:58 pm

M and My God -- I will again challenge you to have an opinion that matches your current stand when and if you ever have someone in your family murdered and face a relative with a life-threatening illness.

Are you the same group of people not wanting these 43k or 40k (depending on which PW weekly thread you believe) released? If so, then you CAN NOT have it BOTH ways!!! Dare I say hypocritical behavior lives and reigns in both of you?

I am not part of the group you were referring to; I would also need to see more detail on the release concept before I can form an opinion on that matter. I will say this much, I have had family members face life threatening illnesses; both my parents had cancer for starters. I also have had a close friend who was shot to death by a man on PCP. I have also had multiple friends die from drug abuse, either suicide or overdose, and one of my closest friends died of AIDS back in back in the late 90s. Once again I will ask that you do not assign me a position, or inform me that my stance is not valid based upon your criteria or personal experiences.

I do not support the violation of any person's human rights for any reason. While many times in human history we have seen groups of people be them innocent or criminal forced to suffer at the hands of the state. Many times there is a justification that such abuse is for the common good, that the few should suffer to better the whole of society. Statements and grand notions about the betterment of a society fade away in time. What takes their place is a justification that the people being forced to suffer have done something wrong, or are less valuable as the rest of the population, in short they are marginalized and become less than human in the eyes of others. While it is easy to take vengeance upon those who have done you harm, or those who remind you of the people who have done you harm, if you do take vengeance upon others does that leave you any better than those who hurt you or your family or loved ones in the first place? This is why the Eye for and Eye concept has fallen out of favor in modern times.

The fact of the matter regarding prisoners is that the state has a legal responsibility to provide them with their basic needs, keep them safe (as best they can I suppose) and not to violate their human rights while they serve their sentences to repay society and eventually return to the world. Those who do not get to return to society are either to spend the remainder of their lives in prison, separated from society so as not to harm anyone else as they are simply too dangerous to have roaming about freely, or they are executed by the state as their crime is seen as so heinous that anything short of their life will not be an acceptable price or repayment.

My point is this; serial killers, mass murderers, rapists, child molester and the like are clearly dangerous humans and should not be free to roam about in society. As disgusting and barbarous as their crimes may be we have the responsibility to keep them segregated from society but not to defile them as they have defiled us.

Yet, there are many other crimes for which people are incarcerated. Would a burglar deserve to be tortured, or have medical experimentation done upon him or her? Would a man who got drunk and caused a fist fight and later was arrested and convicted of assault deserve to experimented upon? Would a an 18 year old kid who got caught up with the wrong crowd eventually getting hooked on drugs, who robbed a house to get money for drugs deserve to be experimented upon? People make poor decisions, hell they make down right stupid choices and get themselves in serious trouble all the time. Does that make one evil? Does that make one no longer worthy of human rights, does it make them have so little value that we may treat them as we wish without regard for their well being? I am sure it does not.

Nearly all the major and minor religions of the world have the same standards, in that we humans are not to judge others, not to seek vengeance upon others, even in the face of great wrong doing. Even our justices system does not judge people; it simple passes judgment upon one's actions and assigns a price for each transgression accordingly as prescribed by the law. It is easy to assume, assign opinions, and judge. It is even easier to seek revenge. Just because it is easy is it right?

I sympathize for you and your family if they are going through or have gone through either of the things you mentioned. If that is the case I do wish you and you family all the best in overcoming such tragic circumstances.

I do apologize for the ridiculous length of my posts, I can't help myself. I also apologize for being directly insulting to you as a person, and insinuating that you are a terrible person which I am sure you are not.

Don't miss out on the discussion!Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name:*

Select your neighborhood or school community:*

Comment:*

Verification code:* Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.